Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2016, 06:16:14 pm
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Be sure to enable your "Ultimate Profile" for even more goodies on your profile page!

  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 93
1  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Blowin' in the Wind: A Timeline from the 1960s Onward on: April 10, 2016, 07:40:38 am
Does Oswald  remain  a   obscure  figour in this t.l.
I am curious what happens to  Reagan. Goldwalter  and John kennedy in this t.l.
Maybe JFK makes a comeback in 1968 and serves as President from 1969-1977 and Ronald Reagan gets elected in 1976 and serves from 1977-1985?
2  General Discussion / Alternative History / Re: What if Gerald Ford had been reelected? on: April 07, 2016, 10:13:25 am
Most people tend to think Gerry would have had it rough and finished in 1981 a mediocre president.

But tbh I don't think he would have done as bad as Carter did. Carter was an extremely naive optimist who himself admitted that he did a terrible job of reaching out to people. He was too much of an outsider who was extremely vague on what he wanted  to do. Ford on the other hand was a master at congress and knew how to use that to his advantage. I see more successful stuff being passed or at least Ford trying to pass his versions of it.

Domestically I think he would have done better than Carter did. The economy was on the up for most of 76. His tax cuts were working and things were going well. He wanted to do more to help make things more efficient and keep creating jobs, he had almost 4 million new ones by July 76. He wanted to pass some more tax changes and de-regulate some industries. IDK if that could have worked but the tax thing could have.  He wanted to have more domestic drilling too which could have helped if the 79 oil crisis came around.

The main thing that I am 50/50 on is Iran. He could either refused the Shah or let him in. I like to think he would have done the former but who knows. Either way it would have made or broke the 4 years.

Economy wise it's really iffy to say. He could have easily improved things in long term or he could have just made them stay where they were until his last year or so and his successor would have had to deal with it. Inflation would have been a headache regardless.

As for who would have followed I say a democrat it would have been. Reps would have been in for 11 years and that's a good while. I see Dole getting the nom with Bush as his VP, and the Dems nominating Kennedy, Brown, or Mondale.  I see Brown getting it more than anything. Kennedy would stay out and Mondale was a bore.





Brown/Bentsen-321 EV's, 51%
Dole/Bush-217 EV's, 44%
Anderson/Lucey-0 EV's, 5%


Anderson kills Dole and the Reps chances. Debate happens in RL and Brown wins with his version of Reagan's pitch.  Reagan is just bitter he is not the lead here, the party stays more moderate and conservatism doesn't happen for the Reps.

Brown is there at least until 84 but if he's half as bit as successful as Reagan was he would be in until 89, where Bentsen gets it until 92 or 96.


I think in the end Ford would have went down as a fine President. Not the best or worst he did the best with a rough as hell situation.
It is entirely possible that Ford would have supported the Shah much more than Carter in lead up to the Iranian Revolution, which might have resulted a much more bloodshed in the Revolution than in RL (I know that the Shah killed about 60,000 people during the Revolution in RL, so the death toll would probably be much higher if the US directly supported the Shah).
3  General Politics / Individual Politics / Re: Who would you have voted for in in past presidential elections? on: April 05, 2016, 02:28:42 pm
1972: George McGovern (Democratic)
1976: Jimmy Carter (Democratic)
1980: Jimmy Carter, reluctantly
1984: Walter Mondale (Democratic)
1988: Michael Dukakis (Democratic)

1992: Andre Marrou (Libertarian)
1996: Robert Dole (Republican)
2000: Bush or Nader (Green), probably Bush (to stop Gore)
2004: Ralph Nader
2008: Cynthia McKinney (Green)

2012: Jill Stein (Green)
You wouldn't have supported Reagan in 1980 or 1984?
4  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Congressional Elections / Re: MO Senate; Roy Blunt may be in trouble after all on: April 04, 2016, 10:03:09 am
I've thought all along that Kander could win.  And if Trump is the GOP nominee, I suspect he will.
That's what I thought since 2013 as well.
5  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Presidential Election Trends / Re: Why is The USA shifting leftward on: April 03, 2016, 10:54:10 am
Because of two issues: 2008 and immigration. 2008 will probably be the most dramatic shift of economy in our lifetimes, in which fossil fuels have gave way to Solar energy. As AL Gore correctly predicted. As Americans have left newspaper jobs tp go to service jobs. By now, most have adjusted to. Unlikely to repeat under a Dem president and it happened under Bush W. Immigrants, as more children of immigrants get adjusted like regular citizens, their conservative past will leave them like most Mexicans
Huh?
6  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Could Trump hit Akin levels in Missouri? on: April 01, 2016, 08:44:55 am
I think that Trump could end up with around 60% of the vote in Missouri, as Clinton isn't really that great of a fit for the state. I do think that there is going to be a sizable number of Trump/Kander voters however.
7  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Who Wins New York (D) on April 19? on: March 31, 2016, 12:58:05 pm
Clinton by a 70-30 margin over Sanders.
8  General Politics / Political Debate / Re: Who would be worse: Donald Trump or Ron Paul? on: March 29, 2016, 08:36:23 am
DRUMPF, Paul was/is amazing Cheesy I'm a Paultard
9  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Tom Coburn and Rick Perry discussed as potential third party Trump opponents on: March 20, 2016, 12:17:03 pm
I would say that Rubio/Romney or Rubio/Gardner would be the more likely third party ticket against Clinton and Trump.
10  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Clinton vs Trump(with maps) on: March 17, 2016, 11:36:29 am
Trump Ceiling:


Clinton Ceiling:
11  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Election What-ifs? / Re: Post random maps here on: March 15, 2016, 09:27:47 pm

Clinton/Castro vs Rubio/Snyder vs Trump/LePage?
12  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Be bold: The Republican nominee (after March 8 primaries)? on: March 09, 2016, 06:05:36 pm
Clearly Rubio. He annihilated Trump and Cruz yesterday.
13  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Incumbent GOP Senator up for Re-election in 2016 will endorse Clinton over Trump on: March 03, 2016, 01:48:52 pm
Lisa Murkowski.

She's in AK, a safe red state, and facing no Democratic opposition as of right now
She might be in trouble if Joe Miller mounts a third party bid and if Mark Begich gets the Democratic Senate nomination.
14  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Arkansas could be in play with Hillary in the fall, per CNN on: March 02, 2016, 08:08:31 am
The Clinton News Network goes overboard for her.
15  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: WV- Trump up 37 on Clinton on: March 01, 2016, 05:58:09 pm
Hillary would make up losses in SW PA, SE OH with even bigger than Obama wins in the Philly burbs, Ohio cities.
I don't really see Hillary Clinton doing all that much better than Obama in the cities in Ohio. If anything, she will fall to Kerry 2004 levels in Columbus and lose Cincinnati by about 5% to any of the Republicans running. As for Pennsylvania, I would argue that Donald Trump, John Kasich, and especially Marco Rubio could win the state despite losing the Philadelphia suburbs by large margins by focusing on increasing turnout in the rural areas of the state and by campaigning heavily in Pittsburgh and its surrounding suburbs. If I were Donald Trump, I would actually write off Virginia, North Carolina, and Florida and instead focus on winning the rest of the Romney 2012 states in addition to Colorado, Ohio, Iowa, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. Both Wisconsin and Michigan are a bit of a stretch, but Trump could potentially do well with blue collar voters in both states.
16  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Beefs with Hillary on: February 28, 2016, 12:10:31 pm
- Unlike her husband, Mrs. Clinton is not personable. She has no idea how to handle the press (heck, when she and Bill are out together, if someone in the press shouts a question, she ignores them, but Bill will stop to offer an answer; that sums things up). She's basically aloof, and people get the feeling she feels that she's above their petty concerns, and the feeling is not unjustified. And as a candidate, Hillary has tended to be deeply cautious, guarded and suspicious of everyone, both supporters and opponents. She is, in a word, prickly.

Yet some people wants to treat her like she's some sort of Bill's extension while, as you pointed out, she is not.

I never really agreed with either Bill or Hillary Clinton politically and felt that Bill Clinton was a very overrated President. I also feel that Hillary Clinton is very uncarismatic and strongly disagree with her foreign policy positions such as her support for a no fly zone in Syria (for which Russia would likely respond to negatively) and her strong support for sanctions (and possibly military action) against Iran. Both actions would serve to only further destabilize the Middle East and increase the chances for a major war to eventually occur. On the issue of foreign policy, Hillary Clinton is no different than Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz in my opinion.

I'd also add intervention in Libya with achieved... what exactly?
The intervention in Libya did not achieve anything at all, as the country is more unstable today than ur ever was under Gaddafi's rule and it is on the brink of collapse. I also find it funny that many people on the site feel that Hillary Clinton is going to win the 2016 election with a 400 Electoral vote landslide. Clinton is actually a paper tiger and is behind in many of the major swing states such as Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, and Colorado.
17  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Beefs with Hillary on: February 28, 2016, 11:34:24 am
I never really agreed with either Bill or Hillary Clinton politically and felt that Bill Clinton was a very overrated President. I also feel that Hillary Clinton is very uncarismatic and strongly disagree with her foreign policy positions such as her support for a no fly zone in Syria (for which Russia would likely respond to negatively) and her strong support for sanctions (and possibly military action) against Iran. Both actions would serve to only further destabilize the Middle East and increase the chances for a major war to eventually occur. On the issue of foreign policy, Hillary Clinton is no different than Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz in my opinion.
18  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential General Election Polls / Re: FL-PPP: Trump is the only Republican who leads Clinton and Sanders (!!!) on: February 26, 2016, 12:34:28 pm
Hillary Clinton seems to be a great fit for Florida, so I'm not really surprised with the results.
19  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion / Gubernatorial/Statewide Elections / Re: NJ 2017 Dem Gov primary on: February 22, 2016, 09:56:26 am
Probably either Pallone or Fulop.
20  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: March 1st State Ratings on: February 21, 2016, 08:27:54 pm
Republicans:
Alabama: Trump
Alaska: Cruz
Arkansas: Cruz
Colorado: Cruz
Georgia: Rubio
Massachusetts: Trump
Minnesota: Cruz
Oklahoma: Cruz
Tennessee: Rubio
Vermont: Trump
Virginia: Trump
Wyoming: Trump

Democrats:
Alabama: Clinton
Arkansas: Clinton
Colorado: Sanders
Georgia: Clinton
Massachusetts: Sanders
Minnesota: Sanders
Oklahoma: Clinton
Tennessee: Clinton
Texas: Clinton
Vermont: Sanders
Virginia: Clinton
21  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Will Hillary Clinton be our 45th President? on: February 21, 2016, 08:18:45 pm
Probably, but I doubt she will last more than one term.
Be ready for President Tom Cotton after her LOL.
22  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: Most plausible Bloomberg victory map on: February 18, 2016, 01:38:45 pm
There is no such thing as a plausible Bloomberg victory map

I was gonna say. He's known out here in the Midwest as the guy who "banned Big Gulp drinks in New York" and to be honest, he is not very tall or physically Presidential. Nor is he inspiring.
Pretty much this^ Even though I would likely support Bloomberg as a protest vote if he mounted an independent bid in 2016 (Hillary Clinton is already out of the question for me at this point and the only Republican candidate who I presently support is John Kasich), I do not see a path for victory for him. I would assume that he would do well with independents in the Northeast, but don't see how he could appeal to more conservative voters in the South and Midwest.
23  Presidential Elections - Analysis and Discussion / 2016 U.S. Presidential Election / Re: If the Gilmore hadn't suspended his campaign... on: February 18, 2016, 10:35:38 am
Jim Gilmore was the president that we needed, but not the one we deserved.
24  General Discussion / History / Re: When did the USA become the world's number one superpower? on: February 14, 2016, 11:25:07 am
The US became the worlds number one superpower after World War 1 in my opinion. I would also argue that the major economic superpowers for the 21st Century will be the US, Iran, China, and India. The US, India, and China will continue to grow economically, though at a slower rate than in previous years, while the economy of Iran will begin to grow and industrialize at a rapid pace as a result of the removal of sanctions and the emergence of a strong technology industry in Iran.
25  General Discussion / History / Re: After FDR which president had the most big business opposition? on: February 14, 2016, 11:15:45 am
I would say either Truman, Clinton, or Obama.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 93


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines